MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 14: Sex, Gender, Socioeconomic Status and Access to Cardiac Catheterization in the Context of Universal Healthcare Coverage

2014· article· en· W2257856492 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gabriel E. Fabreau, Alexander A. C. Leung, Danielle A. Southern, John Z. Ayanian, William A. Ghali

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiac catheterizationSocioeconomic statusOdds ratioDemographyOddsCohortContext (archaeology)Emergency medicineHealth careLogistic regressionInternal medicinePopulationEnvironmental healthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Sex and gender disparities have been described in cardiac care and outcomes following acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Socioeconomic status (SES) may also affect medical care and health outcomes, partly through barriers in access to cardiac catheterization. In Canada, a universal healthcare system may reduce these barriers. We sought to determine whether sex/gender and SES interact to modify the receipt of cardiac catheterization and mortality following an ACS in a universal healthcare system. Methods: Using a provincial multicenter cardiac registry, we assembled a cohort of 14,012 patients admitted with an ACS to any cardiology service in the southern health zones of Alberta, Canada between April 18, 2004 and December 31, 2011 by linking census, vital statistics and clinical registry data. SES was estimated using residential neighbourhood median household income from the 2006 Canadian census. We compared the odds of receiving a cardiac catheterization within 1 and 30 days of admission, and the odds of death within 30 days and 1 year of admission by income quintiles and stratified by sex. Using multivariable logistic regression we controlled for age, geography, cardiac risk factors and clinical comorbidities to estimate the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of receiving cardiac catheterization and of death. Results: Unadjusted rates of catheterization were higher for men compared to women, with 41% (4048 of 9995) vs. 31% (1237 of 4017) at one day, and 72% (7166 of 9995) vs. 62% (2495 of 4017) at 30 days (p<0.001 for both time points). Further, men had lower mortality rates with 2% (200 of 9995) vs. 2.8% (112 of 4017) at 30 days, and 5.2% (520 of 9995) vs. 7.4% (297 of 4017) at 1 year (p<0.001 for both time points). In models adjusting for SES, women were less likely to receive cardiac catheterization within 1 day (OR 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 - 0.87) and 30 days (OR 0.73, 95% CI, 0.62-0.86) of admission with an ACS. When examined across SES quintiles, adjusted models revealed differing relationships for men vs. women: each incremental decrease in income quintile was associated with a 7% lower odds of receiving catheterization for women (p=0.005) vs. a smaller 3% decrement in odds for men (p=0.03). Additionally, among women, each decrease in income quintile was associated with a 13% higher odds of 30-day mortality (p=0.02) vs. a 4% higher odds of 30-day mortality for men (p=0.39). Conclusion: The relationships between SES and use of cardiac catheterization and mortality after ACS differ for men vs. women, with women seemingly more vulnerable to the detrimental associations of low income. These findings were present despite a universal healthcare system. This suggests that factors other than insurance status are at play, and that elements of sex and/or gender are effect modifiers. Care protocols designed to improve access to care and outcomes in women, especially low SES women, are required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207